NEW FRENCH CRISIS

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27375, 14 June 1954, Page 9

NEW FRENCH CRISIS

Laniel Ministry Defeated

(2V.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 10 p.m.) ' PARIS, June 12. The Prime Minister (Mr Joseph Laniel) was defeated on a vote of confidence in the National Assembly today and Mr Laniel offered his Government’s resignation to the President (Mr Rene Coty). Mr Coty said he would decide within 48 hours whether to accept the resignation. The Government was defeated in a vote of confidence on its Indo-Ghina policy when 306 Deputies voted against the Government and 293 supported its policy. The opposition fell eight short of the absolute majority of 314 votes needed for the automatic fall of the Government. Mr Coty is expected to accept the resignation. If he does, the Far East conference at Geneva will almost certainly be suspended because of the recall of the French Foreign Minister (Mr Bidault).

Even if Mr Coty refuses to accept the resignation, it is expected that the Gaullists and Radical Ministers will resign personally, bringing about the Government’s inevitable collapse.

Mr Coty asked for a breathing space of 48 hours to confer with political leaders on two possible means to avoid leaving France leaderless at this critical stage:—

Temporarily patching up the five-party Laniel Coalition. Rapidly forming an alternative government.

But with eight Radical and four Gaullist Ministers determined to resign. political observers see little chance for the Laniel Government. Mr Laniel’s Ministers are due to meet again on Monday afternoon to consider their position.

When Mr Laniel appeared in the Assembly after the official proclamation of his defeat, some members shouted, “Resign.”

Socialist Opposition Few observers were willing to predict the outcome of the crisis if Mr Laniel’s resignation was accepted, but they estimated that the next government was unlikely to be very different in its composition. Since the Socialists, the largest Parliamentary group with 105 Deputies, are reluctant to join any government now, any new Premier would still have to depend on the same groups as Mr Laniel. t Growing Popular Republican determination to obtain a decision on the European Army means that one of the key .issues which led to the disintegration of the Laniel Government would remain an obstacle to the formation -of a new one.

Without the Socialists, any new Premier must have Gaullist and Popular Republican support. Popular Republican Ministers reaffirmed today that their party would refuse to support any Premier who tried to reverse French foreign policy—a warning against any attempt to scrap the European Army plan. They had also threatened to provoke the dissolution of Parliament and new elections, but the President of the Republic cannot decree this unless governments are brought down within 18 months by more than half of the 637-member Assembly. Mr Laniel’s predecessor was overthrown by an absolute majority, but the present Government just managed to avoid it. Mr Laniel’s relations with the Radicals have been markedly cool since they successfully blocked his election as President of the Republic last December. In addition, many backbenchers voted against the Government to express their disapproval of the policy which led to the fall of Dien Bien Phu, the conduct of Mr Bidault in Geneva, and the mounting tension

On the economic front, Mr Laniel has improved France’s balance of payments, but last August he faced a critical labour situation when strikers paralysed the country’s public services and many sections of industry. Foreign affairs bedevilled his Government from the beginning and he and his Ministers had to face most serious setbacks in the seven-year-old Indo-China war, delay over the European Defence Community and the smouldering crisis in North Africa. Speech to Assembly Earlier in the day, Mr Laniel was coldly received in the National Assembly when he made a final bid to save his Government. Only Popular Republicans and his own Conservative Party applauded his 20-minute statement, in which he warned Deputies that it was easier to throw out the Government than to form a new one. Mr Laniel provoked some protests from the Radical benches when he said: “If there is a majority in this House which favours an Asiatic Munich and the abandonment of the Atlantic Pact, then let this majority overthrow the Government, which is faithful to France and her alliances.” He protested against suggestions that “France should horse trade an IndoChina truce for her security in Europe.” Mr Laniel, in a reference to the difficulties which a crisis would provoke, said: “Where are these clearsighted men who could form rapidly a new government with a programme backed by a large and faithful majority in Parliament?” He continued: “I have always taken my responsibilities and shall continue to do so as long as I have the confidence of the Assembly, but I am not prepared to take on such responsibilities if I am head of, a mere caretaker government. “Thus those who demand • a cease fire would put back indefinitely its possible realisation. At what date could negotiations be resumed and at what price? Vietminh propaganda would profit from it by demanding our capitulation. Think of the morale of our expeditionary corps and the echo your vote will provoke beyond our j frontiers.”